Refractive outcomes of 8 biometric formulas in combined phacovitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling for epiretinal membrane

Accuracy of intraocular lens formulas in combined phacovitrectomy

PURPOSE

To assess the refractive accuracy of eight intraocular lens (IOL) formulas in eyes that underwent combined phacovitrectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 59 eyes that underwent uncomplicated phacovitrectomy between 2017 and 2020 at the Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute. Inclusion criteria were postoperative best corrected visual acuity of 20/40 or better within 6 months of surgery and IOL implantation in the capsular bag. The Barrett Universal II (BUII), Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVOv2.0), Hill-Radial Basis Function (Hill-RBFv3.0), Hoffer Q, Holladay I, Kane, Ladas Super Formula (LSF), and SRK/T formulas were compared for accuracy in predicting postoperative spherical equivalents (SE) using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Pearson's correlation coefficients were used to assess correlations between biometric parameters and errors for all formulas.

RESULTS

Prediction errors of SE ranged from - 1.69 to 1.43 diopters (D), mean absolute errors (MAE) ranged from 0.39 to 0.47 D, and median absolute errors (MedAE) ranged from 0.23 to 0.37 D among all formulas. The BUII had the lowest mean error (- 0.043), MAE (0.39) and MedAE (0.23). The BUII also had the highest percentage of eyes with predicted error within ± 0.25 D (51%) and ± 0.50 D (83%). Based on MedAE however, no pairwise comparisons resulted in statistically significant differences. Axial length (AL) was positively correlated with the error from the Hoffer Q and Holladay I formulas (correlation coefficients = 0.34, 0.30, p values < 0.01, 0.02 respectively).

CONCLUSION

While all eight IOL formulas had comparable accuracy in predicting refractive outcomes in eyes undergoing combined phacovitrectomy, the BUII and Kane formulas had a tendency to greater accuracy.

ACCURACY OF NEW INTRAOCULAR LENS CALCULATION FORMULAE IN EYES UNDERGOING SILICONE OIL REMOVAL/PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY-CATARACT SURGERY

PURPOSE

To investigate the performance of novel intraocular lens calculation formulae (Barrett Universal II, Emmetropia Verifying Optical, and Kane) and conventional formulae (Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/T [SRK/T]) in patients who underwent pars plana vitrectomy or silicone oil removal combined with cataract surgery.

METHODS

In total, 301 eyes from 301 patients who underwent pars plana vitrectomy/silicone oil removal with concomitant cataract surgery were enrolled and divided into the following four groups according to preoperative diagnosis: silicone oil-filled eyes after pars plana vitrectomy, epiretinal membrane, primary retinal detachment, and macular hole.

RESULTS

Barrett Universal II exhibited the smallest mean absolute error (0.65 diopters [D]) and median absolute error (0.39 D) in total. In patients with primary retinal detachment, each formula exhibited the worst refractive outcomes in diverse vitreoretinal pathologies ( P < 0.01), and no difference in accuracy between the seven formulas was observed ( P = 0.075). For long eyes, the second linear (Wang-Koch 2) version of the Wang-Koch adjustment significantly reduced the median absolute error for Holladay 1 and SRK/T ( P < 0.001 and P = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

In combined surgery, both new and conventional formulas using the second linear version of the Wang-Koch 2 adjustment demonstrated satisfactory performance, with Barrett Universal II exhibiting the best overall performance. However, in patients with primary retinal detachment, all seven formulas showed less favorable performance.

Influence of endotamponade on anterior chamber depth and refractive outcome after combined phacovitrectomy: case-control study

PURPOSE

To compare the changes in the anterior chamber depth (ACD) and in the refractive outcomes after combined phacovitrectomy with respect to the endotamponade (balanced salt solution, air, sulfur hexafluoride [SF 6 , gas]).

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.

DESIGN

Retrospective, longitudinal case-control study.

METHODS

160 eyes of 160 patients were included in the study. 120 eyes underwent phacoemulsification with in-the-bag implantation combined with vitrectomy and were divided into 3 groups according to tamponade (balanced salt solution, air, gas). 40 control eyes with cataract surgery only were included. Further inclusion criteria were uneventful surgery, no postoperative complications and absence of corneal pathology. Endpoints were ACD as measured by swept-source optical coherence tomography-based biometry (IOLMaster 700) preoperatively, 1 to 2 days and 6 weeks postoperatively and refractive prediction error (PE) using the Barrett and Haigis formulas.

RESULTS

Within the first 2 days after surgery the ACD was shallower in the eyes left with gas or air tamponade, when compared with balanced salt solution or cataract surgery alone ( P < .001). This effect diminished 6 weeks later, and all eyes reached comparable ACD ( P = .396). The refractive PE was slightly, but statistically significantly higher in the gas group when compared with cataract surgery alone ( P = .012 for Barrett, P = .006 for Haigis).

CONCLUSIONS

The resulting ACD after combined phacovitrectomy was independent of the tamponade used, but a gas-tamponade was associated with a higher refractive PE.

Posterior Corneal Asphericity and the Refractive Outcome after Combined Phacovitrectomy

BACKGROUND

We assessed the correlation of posterior corneal asphericity and the refractive prediction error of the SRK-T and Barrett II Universal formulas for eyes following phacovitrectomy with peeling of the internal limiting membrane (ILM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 41 eyes of 41 patients following a combined phacovitrectomy with ILM peeling. Surgeries were performed by one fellowship-trained vitreoretinal surgeon between 2016 and 2021.

RESULTS

Of the 41 patients, 41 eyes were included, with all having at least 1 month of postoperative data. Of the 41 eyes, 19 eyes were female (46%) and 22 were male (54%). The average age of the study population was 77.5 ± 10.7 years. The mean axial length (AL) was 22.7 ± 4.6 mm and the mean anterior chamber depth (ACD) was 3 ± 0.8 mm. The mean posterior Q value was - 0.29 ± 0.27. The mean absolute error (MAE) values 1-month postoperatively for the SRK-T and Barrett II Universal formulas were 0.73 and 0.65, respectively. Regression analysis yielded a significant correlation between posterior corneal asphericity and SRK-T MAE (r = 0.35, R² = 0.12, p < 0.05) only.

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior corneal surface asphericity is correlated to the refractive error of the SRK-T formula for eyes following phacovitrectomy.

Prospective comparison of accuracy of intraocular lens calculation formulas in phacovitrectomy: a pilot study in a real-world clinical practice

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations among IOL formulas after phacovitrectomy.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 206 eyes of 206 patients who underwent 25-gauge phacovitrectomy, without gas tamponade, for macular pathology. Pre-operative optical biometry used the IOLMaster 700 to calculate the IOL power with the new formulas, i.e. the Barrett Universal II (BU II), Emmetropia Verifying Optical version 2.0, Hill-Radial Basis Function (RBF) version 3.0, Kane, and Ladas Super Formula, and conventional formulas, i.e. Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, and Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/T (SRK/T). A single-piece foldable IOL was implanted in all cases. Manifest refractions were measured before and 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The BU II formula showed the lowest standard deviation and mean and median absolute errors and had the highest percentage of eyes with a refractive prediction error within ± 0.25 D. The absolute error was significantly lower with the four new formulas, except the Hill-RBF, than with the Hoffer Q (all p =  ≤ 0.010) and Holladay 1 formulas (all p =  < 0.010). The absolute error with the BU II formula was also lower than that with the Holladay 2 (p = 0.012) and SRK/T (p = 0.024) formulas.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the new IOL formulas, except the Hill-RBF, were superior to some of the conventional formulas for calculating IOL power in phacovitrectomy.

Refractive error after combined phaco-vitrectomy: A multicentric study

PURPOSE

To study the post-operative refractive error (RE) of patients undergoing combined phaco-vitrectomy and to find out which intraocular lens (IOL)-power formula had the best refractive outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective multicentric study we compared the preoperative expected target with the postoperative RE of patients undergoing combined phaco-vitrectomy due to vitreomacular traction, macular pucker, full thickness macular hole or lamellar macular hole. A multinomial logistic regression was performed to compare the postoperative REs and the differences between expected and postoperative REs among the SRK-T, Olsen's and Holladay-2 formulas. The correlation between the difference in REs and IOL-power was also studied.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven eyes with a mean axial length of 23.73 ± 1.21 mm were included. Forty-two (63%), 14 (21%) and 11 (16%) eyes were implanted with an IOL that was calculated respectively with SRK-T, Olsen's and the Holladay-2 formula. The mean preoperative expected- and post-operative REs were -0.16 ± 0.12D and -0.48 ± 0.17, respectively (p = 0.045). SRK-T and Holladay-2 formulas led to a significant myopic shift whereas Olsen's caused a significant hyperopic error, independently from the IOL power.

CONCLUSION

Independently from the IOL power, none of the analyzed formulas is precise at calculating the post-operative RE.

Intraocular lens power calculation formulas accuracy in combined phacovitrectomy: an 8-formulas comparison study

Background

Our study aimed to assess and compare the accuracy of 8 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas (Barrett Universal II, EVO 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Kane and PEARL-DGS) in patients submitted to combined phacovitrectomy for vitreomacular (VM) interface disorders.

Methods

Retrospective chart review study including axial-length matched patients submitted to phacoemulsification alone (Group 1) and combined phacovitrectomy (Group 2). Using optimized constants in both groups, refraction prediction error of each formula was calculated for each eye. The optimised constants from Group 1 were also applied to patients of Group 2 – Group 3. Outcome measures included the mean prediction error (ME) and its standard deviation (SD), mean (MAE) and median (MedAE) absolute errors, in diopters (D), and the percentage of eyes within ± 0.25D, ± 0.50D and ± 1.00D.

Results

A total of 220 eyes were included (Group 1: 100; Group 2: 120). In Group 1, the difference in formulas absolute error was significative (p = 0.005). The Kane Formula had the lowest MAE (0.306) and MedAE (0.264). In Group 2, Kane had the overall best performance, followed by PEARL-DGS, EVO 2.0 and Barrett Universal II. The ME of all formulas in both Groups 1 and 2 were 0.000 (p = 0.934; p = 0.971, respectively). In Group 3, a statistically significant myopic shift was observed for each formula (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Surgeons must be careful regarding IOL power selection in phacovitrectomy considering the systematic myopic shift evidenced—constant optimization may help eliminating such error. Moreover, newly introduced formulas and calculation methods may help us achieving increasingly better refractive outcomes both in cataract surgery alone and phacovitrectomy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40942-021-00315-7.

Comparison of two different scleral fixation techniques of posterior chamber Carlevale lens

ABSTRACT

To investigate the surgical outcomes of 2 different scleral fixation techniques of the new single-piece foldable acrylic Carlevale lens (Soleko) and to compare our results with previous reports of the literature.A retrospective, non-randomized comparative study involving 2 series of patients who underwent 2 different scleral fixation techniques of Carlevale lens was performed. Minimum follow-up of 3 months was requested for inclusion in the study. All the patients underwent a standard ophthalmologic examination including best correct visual acuity, measurement of intraocular pressure, anterior segment, and fundus examination. In the first technique (group 1), plugs were externalized through a 23 gauge sclerotomy and placed within 2 scleral pockets. In the second technique (group 2), plugs were externalized through a 25-gauge sclerotomy and covered by 2 scleral flaps. For an estimation of the refractive prediction error, the postoperative spherical equivalent of objective refraction was calculated (IOL Master 750, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany). Spectral domain optical coherence tomography (Spectralis HRA+OCT2, Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) of anterior segment was used to check plugs positioning postoperatively.Twenty-three eyes in group 1 and 9 eyes in group 2 were included. Preoperative diagnosis was aphakia, dislocated posterior chamber intra ocular lens, dislocated lens, anisometropia, Uveitis-Glaucoma-Hyphema syndrome, perforating trauma with dislocated intra ocular lens, and open globe injury with dislocated intra ocular lens. Respectively, in groups 1 and 2, refractive spherical equivalent prediction error was -0,31 ± 0,74 D and -0,27 ± 0,80 D, and postoperative best-corrected visual acuity was 0,42 ± 0,31 logMAR and 0,47 ± 0,45 logMAR. In group 1, 1 eye developed cystoid macular edema, 1 eye vitreous haemorrhage, and 3 eyes showed plugs located outside the scleral pockets under the conjunctiva. Rupture of 1 of the 2 tips of the plug was observed in 1 patient of group 1 during the externalization.Carlevale lens is a scleral fixated intra ocular lens specifically designed for posterior chamber implantation that could be successfully managed without any significant difference between the 2 surgical techniques, and appears approachable for anterior and posterior segment surgeons. A 25-gauge sclerotomy should be preferred with the aim of a sutureless surgery regardless the technique employed.

A novel approach for scleral fixation using Carlevale lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate the surgical outcomes and feasibility of a novel approach for scleral-fixation using a single-piece acrylic foldable Carlevale lens (Soleko).

METHODS

Eighteen eyes of 18 patients with aphakia, dislocated IOL, subluxated lens, anisometropia, perforated trauma, and retinal detachment who underwent IOL implantation with a Carlevale lens were evaluated. All the patients underwent a standard ophthalmologic examination. Anterior segment (AS)-OCT was used postoperatively to check plugs positioning and IOL tilt.

RESULTS

Mean patients age was 73 ± 19 years. Mean follow-up was 11.2 ± 4.1 months. Mean axial length was 23.7 ± 1.65 mm, white-to-white distance was 11.74 ± 0.40 mm, and axial length was 23.67 ± 1.65 mm. Refractive spherical equivalent prediction error was -0.31 ± 0.71D. Mean IOL tilt was 2.2° ± 1.6° and plugs were placed within the sclera. Five patients had aphakia, five in-the-bag IOL subluxation, three in-the-bag IOL luxation, one high residual myopia after previous verisyse implant, one Uveitis-Glaucoma-Hyphema syndrome, one perforating trauma with phacodonesis, one intraocular foreign body and retinal detachment, two lens subluxation. One eye developed cystoid macular edema which disappeared with topical steroids and FANS. No other complications were observed throughout the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Carlevale lens (Soleko) appears to be a viable option for both anterior and posterior segment surgeons in the management of complex cases providing less challenging maneuvers which lead to a good lens self-centration and minimal risk of haptic rupture and/or dislocation. The lens seems to offer a good compartmentalization between the anterior and posterior chamber reducing the risk of an inflammatory response.